On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:40:54 -0700 Ken Whistler <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8/24/2011 10:48 AM, Richard Wordingham wrote: >> if, say, >> code points are squandered. > Oh. > Well, in that case, the correct action is to work to ensure that code > points are not squandered. Have there not already been several failures on that front? The BMP is littered with concessions to the limitations of rendering systems - precomposed characters, Hangul syllables and Arabic presentation forms are the most significant. Hangul syllables being also a political compromise does not instil confidence in the lines of defence. I don't dispute that there have also been victories. Has Japanese disunification been completely killed, or merely scotched? > > I think, however, that<high><high><rare > > BMP code><low> offers a legitimate extension mechanism > One could argue about the description as "legitimate". It is clearly > not conformant, With what? It's obviously not UTF-16 as we know it, but a possibly new type of code-unit sequence. > and would require a decision about an architectural change to the > standard. Naturally. The standard says only 17 planes. However, apart from UTF-16, the change to the *standard* would not be big. (Even so, a lot of UTF-8 and UTF-32 code would have to be changed to accommodate the new limit.) > I see no chance of that happening for either the Unicode > Standard or 10646. It will only happen when the need becomes obvious, which may be never, or may be 30 years hence. It's even conceivable that UTF-16 will drop out of use. > Here are the current stats for the forthcoming Unicode 6.1, counting > *designated* > code points (as opposed to assigned graphic characters). > Plane 0: 63,207 / 65,536 = 96.45% full > Plane 1: 7497 / 65,536 = 11.44% full > Plane 2: 47,626 / 65,536 = 72.67% full (plane reserved for CJK > ideographs) > Plane 14: 339 / 65,536 = 0.52% full > Plane 15: 65,536 / 65,536 = 100% full (PUA) > Plane 16: 65,536 / 65,536 = 100% full (PUA) I only see two planes that are actually full. Which are you counting as the full non-PUA plane? Richard.
